Equivalent but not the Same: Teaching and Learning in Full Semester and Condensed Summer Courses

Abstract

Research on teaching and learning in condensed-course formats is varied and difficult to generalize. We analyze this research and identify factors that may account for the varied findings. Additionally, we present a mixed methodology study of 20 matched-pair courses (i.e., full and condensed formats) from 11 disciplines which examines student learning and student and faculty perception data. We find that faculty and students perceive condensed courses as more effective, but that student learning varies depending upon the measures used to assess it. We conclude by considering the implications of our study for teaching and assessment practices.

Keywords:

• Condensed courses
• summer courses
• student learning
• student perceptions
• faculty perceptions

Acknowledgements

We would like the faculty, staff, and students at Carnegie Mellon University for their time and willingness to participate in this study, and Marsha Lovett and Chad Hershock for their input during the conceptualization this study.

Notes

1 We attempted to conduct a retention test 3 months after the conclusion of the course, but due to an extremely low response rate, we were not able to include this measure.

2 We used full maximum likelihood (FML) as the method of estimation, in order to produce deviance statistics that could be used to compare models in terms of their fit. Independent variables were added sequentially, and the change in the -2 Log Likelihood deviance statistic was assessed after each variable was added. A chi square statistic was used to assess whether the model fit significantly improved, and variables were retained in the model if this statistic was significant.

3 We administered pretests and posttests to seven classes in the Summer 2016 and Fall 2016 cohorts, of which we received four completed sets of pretests and posttests.